agamoto
Soldier
Greetings and salutations one and all!!
Posts: 239
|
Post by agamoto on Oct 17, 2003 15:05:31 GMT -5
Let me say this then, No living mortal man(or woman) can say for certian one way or the other, and thus it boils down to faith, what do YOU as an individual believe? That is what is true to you.
"And this above all else, unto thine own self be true."
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Oct 17, 2003 16:15:50 GMT -5
And how does one determine this faith, on the words of others or something else. A man told me to read the bible you will be a better christian. I read the bible and I'm a better atheist. I cannot use a book filled with myths and mistakes to guide my life. I am not one of those people who will turn a blind eye to the mistakes just to go along with of the masses.
I could point out the myths and mistakes and people will dance around the anwser. But will not anwser, why because what I say isn't a opintion it's fact. The story of creation is filled with holes, hmmm someone else said that. How does the writer fill these holes. It's because God wanted it that way."
The myth of creation has been copied from many other civilations across this planet. They predate the bible's story. The story in the bible isn't the first, it's because of western arrogance that they believe what they write is the only truth.
Now if you would like me to point out some other deceptions and myths I will be glad to discuss this. If by chance this offends anyone, then don't read it and don't respond. I am not trying to convert anyone, unlike religous people I have know. This is just an exchange of thoughts and ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Draxy on Oct 17, 2003 16:40:35 GMT -5
One determines faith in the same way one determines which breakfast cereal one likes. It comes from a personal realization of what suits the individual best for him or her.
If you do not take the Bible literally, show me one mistake in it. If a thing is not literalistic in it's structure than it can not be "wrong" OR "right". It can only do what the books of most religions do, on some level or another, and that is ask you to decide for yourself what it is you want to believe.
The "masses" (meaning the majority) do not, according to most recent poles, at least in the US and most Western European countries, still think that the Bible is to be taken literally. THAT is something from a unfortunately vocal minority who often, because of personal insecurity in their own beliefs, try to overcompensate for that insecurity by insisting that it is all literal.
If you actually read the Bible with the intention of becoming a better christian you will. If you read it with the intention of becoming a better atheist, you will. It really is that simple. But hey, if you read Popular Mechanics with the intention to become a better Christian, or Atheist, or Zen-Bhuddist... you will.
Hey, guys, I am closer to being a scientific determinist than I am to being anything else within the realm of religious idealism, and thus have little use for the Bible except as another of the many tools used to understand my own moral/ethical constructs, but deriding a person who uses it as their primary moral/ethical compass because it can't wash oil out of polyesther fabrics well is just plain silly.
Draxy
|
|
|
Post by Loki3 on Oct 18, 2003 8:52:41 GMT -5
I recently met a girl online, we have been chatting over the phone for 2 weeks now, and seem to have alot in common. Well we had plans to meet last eve........
Well 2 eves ago I am chatting with her on the phone, my friend James is over and she asks for a pic of him because he was being kinda goofy in the background. I sent her one of him on my couch.
Well she opens it, and sais uhhhh ummmmm is that a Lord of The Rings poster on your living room wall, I said yes. Well long conversation made short she was very offended that she has been talking to this nice guy that turns out to be some kind of Pagan............IN HER EYES....
Ime not Pagan, or Wiccan but my friends James and his girl Bri are. Well she goes on to tell me that she wants to live a Christ Centered life, and really got upset when she found out I played AD&D.
Bottom line is that like I told her, being Christ centered is fundamentally about BELIEFS. If "Christians" want to really get into a discussion about this, they need to understand one simple thing.
All religion, including Christianity is based off simple, Pagan roots. This is FACT. I told her this she got mad, and now I am some deviant. Thats fine maybe in some peoples eyes I am. But one can argue this for 20 pages and only get nowhere.
Is there a GOD............. Maybe. Is there not a GOD....... Maybe.
Are we just a fluke of the universe and will never be replicated as so again after we all eventually fade out of the way of things.................
Most Likely.
So sorry to not type more but I have to go now, I am late for a ritual sacrifice........... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Loki3 on Oct 18, 2003 8:59:12 GMT -5
Still also waiting for an answer to this SIMPLE idea.
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Oct 18, 2003 8:59:37 GMT -5
I stumbled into this sort of thing once in a while in my high school days. Didn't help that I went to a Christian youth group ;D. It was kind of fun being the voice of the critic in a group of young Jesus freaks. Now that I'm older, I realize that I took a lot from that group and, no matter how obnoxious I was, they always let me come back. I'd like to think that it was both ways and that I did add something to the group too. At the time, I was fairly undecided about the whole faith thing and I think talking with them really helped. Granted, it helped me to decide that Christianity wasn't for me, but it helped. ;D
What's the point of this rambling? Well, just this. Alway, always, always keep an open mind, regardless of which side of the arguement you come down on. As a scientist, you are required to constantly question everything. And, as a person of faith, you are also to constantly question things. Both the scientist and the priest are seeking the truth. And, for a given value of truth, they can both find it.
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Oct 18, 2003 12:07:52 GMT -5
"The time will come when our posterity will wonder at our ignorance of things so plain." Seneca.
Insecurity, no I think some are actually seeing what the bible really tell's them.
Literally, the priestly accounts of creation is but kindergarten cosmology, yet most have accepted it for two thousand years. This is because western man is incapable of abstract thought.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth..
This very first verse disqualifies the bible as authority, for it implies the aforesaid lack of knowledge. The author did not know how the world was created, and so he said a god created it. This is ignorances way of explaining what it does not understand.
And the earth was without form, and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
"The spirit of God " is a false term due to the idea of a personal deity, the creator, on the contrary, is not a spirit, nor has it a spirit. It is spirit in the sense of substance, a morally unqualified principle, whose modus operandi is that of violence.
Here it moved very gently upon the waters. No mention is made of the violence involved in the creation of a word which includes the sun period nor the trillions of years of time, No word of a "war in heaven" as of John the revlator. Nothing about a beast, a devil, a satan-oppser, just peaceful creation by word of mouth. This is woeful ignorance of cosmology.
And God said let there be light: and there was light.
Here begin's that fatal personification that has decieved the human race. A personal and vocal God said "let there be light" God said nothing of the kind, the allegorist said he said it, which makes all the difference between superstition and knowledge. Man puts words into the mouth of hs creation then later believes this creation spoke.
And god saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Here again, God saw the light, and thought it was good but how did this priestly scribe know that he did? Did God tell him trillions of years later after the act?
No, The world exsists and the author just assumed its various stages were right and proper. That this light is not sunlight is obvivious, since the the stars were not created till the forth day.
And God called the light day, and the darkness he called night. and the evening and the morning were the first day.
As the earth has not yet been formed nor the sun created, they are not our Day and Night; they are what the Hindu's call the Day and Night of Braham, the creator - immeasurable periods in the creative process.
In this account the Day are from the evenining to morning: that's from the darkness of the absolute (non being) to the light of being. As these days are billions if not trillions of years, we see here how much is covered and covered up.
|
|
|
Post by Draxy on Oct 18, 2003 12:42:00 GMT -5
Oh Galadon... why do you hate them so fiercely? Have you heard the self hatred too in your words?
Are you born of western society? Why the self loathing?
What you have said here, by definition, is a false statement. It rather seems that you are the one who is having trouble with "abstract thought", I would imagine purposefully, wanting to take even that which is NOW (forget trying to tie Christianity and other religious idealism to the past, unless you also want to be restricted to using the scientific explanations of yesteryear as well... what is good for the goose is good for the gander after all) as allegory and parable as literal. It is total, utter and complete non-sense.
Do some ignorant folk still cling to it? Absolutely. Why do you wish to lower yourself to that level?
Stating that the Bible is literally incorrect when it is accepted that it is NOT meant to be taken as literal is the height of foolishness.
You don't seem a fool, Galadon, but rather someone so full of hatred towards Christians in general , because of what some may have done to you in the past perhaps?, that you can't see that it has turned you into every bit as zealous a bigot as the worst of the literal Creationists.
Everything you say is based on the Bible being taken only on a literal level.
Is there anyone here in this forum that does so? Anyone at all?
*the sound of the silence is deafening*
I doubt seriously that anyone will claim that. So, what is attacking a mindset that is not here to defend it's view point going to accomplish except to root more deeply your own angst?
Draxy
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Oct 18, 2003 12:58:41 GMT -5
Strange, I thought you were the one with the negative vibes.
Yes I know when someone speaks the truth, others find it painful and then must attack and degrade a person because he dare to speak the truth. Instead of going along with the flock and accepting blind faith.
Hate christain, no I think they are rather amusing.
Just because I point out western people have trouble with abstract thought, does this degrade them or me, no it doesn't. I point out what is.
This man is bald, this man has hair. Oh you a bad man for saying that. Why for saying what is, Amusing. It tell me the one who is taking the negative path is,,,negative himself.
Maybe people don't like to speak of religion because deep down they know, they are not really sure of religion themself "what if it is wrong". This would explain the attacks, and dancing around an anwser instead of anwsering it.
Come now is there nothing more you can add than weak insults.
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Oct 18, 2003 13:27:34 GMT -5
Oh I keep forgetting, when someone, like myself, doesn't guide his life by a bunch of deception and myths. That person has no problems knowing and excepting one's strenght and weakness.
I forget others have trouble with this, I guess I give people to much credit.
|
|
|
Post by Draxy on Oct 19, 2003 3:55:22 GMT -5
Think what you will Galadon. No matter what anyone says you belive that you already know it all anyway.
Your quote was that Not unitl after you are called to task for the statement. They have two very different meanings. You must have chosen your original words for a reason. Ask yourself, honestly, since you believe that you are so enamoured of the truth, what that reason was.
Truth. That's a loaded word. What is "the truth". You know, that's a term that scientists despise and zealots revelle in. The truth may be the single most subjective idea in existence.
What is true to one man is a lie to others.
What is thought to be "true" today may be disproven tomorrow. This is one of the basises of scientific thought. It is FAR more often the religious zealot who claims to have a coner on the truth. Most rational men avoid such frippery.
No one fears the idea of truth. People do though fear the mind set that is convinced that it knows it and that others are deluded or wrong.
Not in this case. You point out what you believe to be. The same as I do, or any expert does, or any kindergarten student does.
Ask almost anyone with a bachelors degree or better what "the truth" is and the most likely answer that you will get will be something along the line of " what is sincerely belived to be the case". Not just "what is", the way you are using it.
No one is dancing around any questions. You are simply not providing the possibility for any answers other than ones you intend to deride.
For instance:
Look at this one for example. This reveals alot. Even though it was phrased in the form of a question it was not ended so. No question mark. Most psychologists will tell you that when this is done it is because of the subconscious desire to have no answer that will challenge already held pre-conceptions.
Too, there are only two, very prejudicial, possibilities given. This question has been answered too, not danced around, just answered with: Neither. Not on faith, nor on the words of others, but on what the self decides is best and true for the self.
Notice: not what is best and true, as that is open to each individuals interpretation, but what is best and true for the self. This is what is known as self honesty. Not deluding ones self to think that if the rest of the world disagrees with you that they are wrong, but that what they say may simply be "wrong" for you.
That, of course, is something usually only learned with age and experience. Not always, but all too often. The main reason that i write this is that where you are now, I can look back on almost verbatim. Because, "there once went I", until I had some of these things said to me and stopped believing that I already knew it all.
Draxy
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Oct 19, 2003 6:27:49 GMT -5
Possibly a little pompous, but an excellent answer nonetheless Draxy. Inner Gorilla gives it a 9.5.
OOK!
|
|
|
Post by Loki3 on Oct 19, 2003 10:30:59 GMT -5
I think on a basic level, no matter if you are of the theory that GOD created us, and all......... or a large explosion ultimatley did. It all falls down to FAITH.
Yes FAITH.
FAITH is the fundamental building block of BELEIF.
You must have FAITH in a idea, in order for that idea to hold credence. So wether ANYONE IN HERE likes it or not they have FAITH.
I am not saying anyone in here is WRONG. What I am saying is that I disagree with there fundamental idea of how we as a "species" came about.
If one classifies the bible as myth, then thats a good thing. If one looks at the bible as fact, then that also is a good thing. WHY you ask?
Simple........... Because everyone has a right to practice there FAITH in there own way.
|
|
|
Post by Draxy on Oct 19, 2003 13:01:42 GMT -5
Possibly a little pompous, but an excellent answer nonetheless Draxy. Inner Gorilla gives it a 9.5. OOK! Hey, pompousity is a specialty of mine. I haven't even gotten warmed up yet. Since I don't ook, except at the wife, I guess I'll just have to: Draxy
|
|
agamoto
Soldier
Greetings and salutations one and all!!
Posts: 239
|
Post by agamoto on Oct 19, 2003 13:29:51 GMT -5
I actualy agree with Loki3.
It all boils down to faith. I have friends that believe in the Noric version of creation, others who follow the Greko-Roman version. I am as of yet undecided.
Shakespear once wrote "This above all else, unto thine own self be true." . These are words to live by.
|
|